"Bush's real objection to Common Article 3
is not that it is vague. It is that it will not
permit abusive practices that he isn't
willing publicly to discuss or defend."
--Washington Post Editorial

.
.
.
."Pope Benedict offered these words of apology. He's sorry that people felt bad. That's known in Vatican terminology as a 'me-a-kinda.' It's a time-honored tradition in the Catholic Church dating back to the Inquisition when Pope Innocent IV said, 'We deeply regret the fact that so many non-believers happen to be flammable'."
-- Jon Stewart

Unfortunately, they have a point. However, as a 1st Amendment Freedom Fighter, I - sigh - have to insist that he has the right to spew his filth under the "free speech" protection. On the other hand, "free speech" does not protect incitement to riot, so if we could get a bit of hard evidence...

This week, President Bush said, "If you listen closely to some of the leaders of the Democratic Party, it sounds like they think the best way to protect the American people is, wait until we're attacked again."

Tonight (10/5/06), Keith Olbermann asks the President:

"Why has the ferocity of your venom against the Democrats, now exceeded the ferocity of your venom against the terrorists?

Why have you chosen to go down in history as the President who made things up?

In less than one month you have gone from a flawed call to unity, to this clarion call to hatred of Americans, by Americans.

If this is not simply the most shameless example of the rhetoric of political hackery, then it would have to be the cry of a leader crumbling under the weight of his own lies."

Bill Moyers writes: "Once upon a time the House of Representatives was
known as 'the people's house.' No more. It belongs to K Street now.
That's the address of the lobbyists who swarm all over Capitol Hill. There
are 65 lobbyists for every member of Congress. They spend $200 million
per month wining, dining and seducing federal officials. Per month!"

Sorry to quote Jesus on a Freethinker's forum, but the man said, "No man can serve two masters. He will love the one and hate the other. He will serve one and not the other" - our Congress now serves corporate CEOs (the more high-paying master, even though even lowly Reps earn enough to put them in the top 3% income bracket). This is why campaign finance reform is so important. Molly Ivins says that's the number one change needed to get America back on track. I think it's number two - number one is breaking the corporate stranglehold on the media.

I believe government has an obligation to open its coffers for competitive bidding to faith-based and community-based groups in order to make sure America — America’s souls are saved one person at a time.
- President George W. Bush 8/30/2006

Actually, I don't have a problem with the saving of American souls "one soul at a time" - there are over 300 million American citizens and another 15 or so million legal aliens (not even counting illegals who, if you go with the stereotype of Mexican, are largely catholic and will take some convincing to be "saved" by converting to an evangelical sect). At one soul a day, that's over 500,000 years and I don't think most of us (or even America) will be around that long. It's the wholesale - I'm going to save America's souls in one felt swoop by theocracy - that bothers me.

Barbara Fitzpatrick wrote:Actually, I don't have a problem with the saving of American souls "one soul at a time" - there are over 300 million American citizens and another 15 or so million legal aliens (not even counting illegals who, if you go with the stereotype of Mexican, are largely catholic and will take some convincing to be "saved" by converting to an evangelical sect). At one soul a day, that's over 500,000 years and I don't think most of us (or even America) will be around that long. It's the wholesale - I'm going to save America's souls in one felt swoop by theocracy - that bothers me.

So you don't think it is a problem when the President comes out and says the government has an obligation to make sure American's souls get saved?

"The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else."

Darrel wrote:"The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else."

Of course I think there's a problem with the president saying the government has as obligation to save souls - the state of my soul is none of his business and it is completely contrary to the 1st Amendment to the Constitution. However, I think there's a problem with most of what comes out of W's mouth and while "saving" my soul is about as invasive as listening to my phone calls and reading my emails and going over my bank and library records without a warrant, he obviously can't actually do the saving of American souls "one soul at a time" while he equally obviously can, and probably has, violate(d) my 4th Amendment rights.

Barbara Fitzpatrick wrote:Of course I think there's a problem with the president saying the government has as obligation to save souls - the state of my soul is none of his business and it is completely contrary to the 1st Amendment to the Constitution. However, I think there's a problem with most of what comes out of W's mouth and while "saving" my soul is about as invasive as listening to my phone calls and reading my emails and going over my bank and library records without a warrant, he obviously can't actually do the saving of American souls "one soul at a time" while he equally obviously can, and probably has, violate(d) my 4th Amendment rights.

Well, I guess it turns out that they are not so concerned about our souls afterall

“History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant.”
--Thurgood Marshall , US Supreme Court Justice

“The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

“I prefer to try to tell the story of the discovery of America from the viewpoint of the Arawaks, of the Constitution from the standpoint of the slaves, of Andrew Jackson as seen by the Cherokees…of the rise of industrialism as seen by the young women in the Lowell textile mills.”
--Howard Zinn, author of A People’s History of the United States.